b. 385
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt I
..
The missing c1-e1 third, ending the phrase of the orchestral part, is most probably a mistake of the engraver of GE. It could also indicate that it was added in the last proofreading of FE, yet the engraver's mistake is supported by the placement of the Solo indication in GE, i.e. only just over the 2nd beat of the bar, probably due to this third, which does not belong to the solo part. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in GE , Authentic corrections of FE |
||||||
b. 385
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt I
..
Chopin precisely marked articulation of the accompaniment also in 5 similar places. In four of them, the slur clearly starts from the 1st quaver, whereas in the fifth case, its beginning is unclear. Since the articulation is undoubtedly supposed to be the same each time, we consider a later beginning of the slur in the discussed bar to be an inaccuracy and in the main text we adopt a slur running from the 1st quaver of the bar. category imprint: Editorial revisions |
||||||
b. 385
|
composition: Op. 16, Rondo in E♭ major
..
In this context, the hairpin in FE (→GE,EE) means almost certainly a long accent – cf. an undoubted accent in a similar bar 393. Hence, it is very probable that the sign was inaccurately rendered (extended) by the engraver. category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: Long accents |
||||||
b. 385-386
|
composition: Op. 16, Rondo in E♭ major
category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: Long accents , Inaccuracies in GE |
||||||
b. 385
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt III
..
The last octave in bar 385 having been moved an octave lower is a revision introduced in GE3, most probably to keep the general shape of the melody (however, one cannot rule out a common mistake). category imprint: Differences between sources issues: GE revisions |